PaulWog
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2013
- Messages
- 1,153
- Reaction score
- 188
- Location
- Canada
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
Hi,
Shortened version:
Is the Canon 6D + 24-105mm lens kit going to be something that someone can grow with and enjoy, and not feel the need to upgrade from (if I'm just an amateur)? My only worry is the autofocus points which have been criticized. I'm looking at getting more seriously into photography, and I want to do it in one go properly (not by getting a beginning DSLR into another one, etc). I want to make sure before I make this purchase that the Canon 6D and the 24-105mm lens kit really are a great choice to go with. I feel as though a full-frame camera is the way to go, and this seems to be a good entry-level price. The price is still steep for me though, so I'm making sure I do this all correctly. Thanks for any help & insight.
Back-story to explain how much I know:
I'm new to higher-end DSLR photography. I've only ever owned one cheap camera back seven or so years ago, although I've played around with some higher-end point-and-shoot cameras. I do have a Galaxy S4 now, and I feel as though the camera (in good lighting) is extremely good, and it has served as a fun point-and-shoot that (again, in the right lighting) seems to rival the point-and-shoots that I've played with. My girlfriend recently picked up a Nikon 1 J3 (she wanted a cross-over between a DSLR and a point-and-shoot), and I've been quite interested in the step up she has been able to take with photography. Overall, I'm simply interested in taking much better photos.
I'm experienced with photoshop (if there's a guide, I can follow it nearly without pausing the video -- I know my way around -- so I learn new things in a pinch). I used to work with photoshop as 50% of my job description for a year. However, I didn't do much real-life photo editing. I'm also quite a bit of a perfectionist, and when I get into something, I tend to want to enter into things at a higher level than most. I believe that buying something like a Rebel T3i or a Nikon D7100 might leave me a little bit sour and wanting more right off the bat.
I was comparing the Nikon 600D and the Canon 6D, and I found that the Canon 6D seems to offer a little bit more on the glass side of things... it has seemingly a better weather seal / build construction (no oil spots)... and its low-light performance is superb. I would likely have chosen a Nikon 600D if I hadn't heard about the oil-spot issues, but after hearing about that, I read more into the 6D and have liked what I've been reading.
My question and to the point:
$2400 is no small price to pay for an amateur who is looking to pick up a new hobby. To me, getting a new camera is 50% a new hobby, and 50% deciding that I want to capture moments in my life and those I care about in higher quality (something that a lot of people don't realize they care about until after the fact). I was looking at $1200 camera + lens kits as the price-point that seemed reasonable, but I realized that once I'm already breaking that $1000 barrier, I need to be absolutely content with my purchase. I feel as though the 6D offers performance that I can be content with for over half a decade without feeling the need to upgrade. The lens selection looks excellent, and starting with a 24-105mm lens seems to be a great way to go (the bundled price is excellent). I don't want something that carries with it good resale value (I don't expect good resale value in 5 years!); I want something that leaves me not wanting more 5 years down the line as an amateur photographer who never plans to go professional... lenses aside, of course.
Would you recommend the Canon 6D as a great full-frame entry-level camera that won't leave an amateur wanting more? Would you say it's a waste in any way if I end up actually using the camera quite frequently? When I make a purchase, I need to feel good about it.
There's two other questions I have:
1) The autofocus points have been something people have complained about. Should this concern me in the long-run?
2) The dynamic contrast range, compared to something like the Nikon 600D, has been criticized in some reviews. Does anyone have input on this?
My plan is to pick up this camera alongside the 24-105mm lens kit, and from there make my decision on lenses as I go very carefully.
One final thing: I haven't found any good reads on camera lenses and longevity (regarding compatibility, not motor life). I'm always told to "build your lens collection first" and "put cash into lenses first!", however I also hear that lenses are only compatible with their respective lines of cameras. So what I'm confused about is what happens when a camera lens no longer has new camera bodies being released for it? How does that work? Do camera lenses die out when their compatible camera bodies are no longer made? If I were to build up a collection of camera lenses compatible with a Canon 6D, where would I be left (option-wise) in the future?
Thanks!
Shortened version:
Is the Canon 6D + 24-105mm lens kit going to be something that someone can grow with and enjoy, and not feel the need to upgrade from (if I'm just an amateur)? My only worry is the autofocus points which have been criticized. I'm looking at getting more seriously into photography, and I want to do it in one go properly (not by getting a beginning DSLR into another one, etc). I want to make sure before I make this purchase that the Canon 6D and the 24-105mm lens kit really are a great choice to go with. I feel as though a full-frame camera is the way to go, and this seems to be a good entry-level price. The price is still steep for me though, so I'm making sure I do this all correctly. Thanks for any help & insight.
Back-story to explain how much I know:
I'm new to higher-end DSLR photography. I've only ever owned one cheap camera back seven or so years ago, although I've played around with some higher-end point-and-shoot cameras. I do have a Galaxy S4 now, and I feel as though the camera (in good lighting) is extremely good, and it has served as a fun point-and-shoot that (again, in the right lighting) seems to rival the point-and-shoots that I've played with. My girlfriend recently picked up a Nikon 1 J3 (she wanted a cross-over between a DSLR and a point-and-shoot), and I've been quite interested in the step up she has been able to take with photography. Overall, I'm simply interested in taking much better photos.
I'm experienced with photoshop (if there's a guide, I can follow it nearly without pausing the video -- I know my way around -- so I learn new things in a pinch). I used to work with photoshop as 50% of my job description for a year. However, I didn't do much real-life photo editing. I'm also quite a bit of a perfectionist, and when I get into something, I tend to want to enter into things at a higher level than most. I believe that buying something like a Rebel T3i or a Nikon D7100 might leave me a little bit sour and wanting more right off the bat.
I was comparing the Nikon 600D and the Canon 6D, and I found that the Canon 6D seems to offer a little bit more on the glass side of things... it has seemingly a better weather seal / build construction (no oil spots)... and its low-light performance is superb. I would likely have chosen a Nikon 600D if I hadn't heard about the oil-spot issues, but after hearing about that, I read more into the 6D and have liked what I've been reading.
My question and to the point:
$2400 is no small price to pay for an amateur who is looking to pick up a new hobby. To me, getting a new camera is 50% a new hobby, and 50% deciding that I want to capture moments in my life and those I care about in higher quality (something that a lot of people don't realize they care about until after the fact). I was looking at $1200 camera + lens kits as the price-point that seemed reasonable, but I realized that once I'm already breaking that $1000 barrier, I need to be absolutely content with my purchase. I feel as though the 6D offers performance that I can be content with for over half a decade without feeling the need to upgrade. The lens selection looks excellent, and starting with a 24-105mm lens seems to be a great way to go (the bundled price is excellent). I don't want something that carries with it good resale value (I don't expect good resale value in 5 years!); I want something that leaves me not wanting more 5 years down the line as an amateur photographer who never plans to go professional... lenses aside, of course.
Would you recommend the Canon 6D as a great full-frame entry-level camera that won't leave an amateur wanting more? Would you say it's a waste in any way if I end up actually using the camera quite frequently? When I make a purchase, I need to feel good about it.
There's two other questions I have:
1) The autofocus points have been something people have complained about. Should this concern me in the long-run?
2) The dynamic contrast range, compared to something like the Nikon 600D, has been criticized in some reviews. Does anyone have input on this?
My plan is to pick up this camera alongside the 24-105mm lens kit, and from there make my decision on lenses as I go very carefully.
One final thing: I haven't found any good reads on camera lenses and longevity (regarding compatibility, not motor life). I'm always told to "build your lens collection first" and "put cash into lenses first!", however I also hear that lenses are only compatible with their respective lines of cameras. So what I'm confused about is what happens when a camera lens no longer has new camera bodies being released for it? How does that work? Do camera lenses die out when their compatible camera bodies are no longer made? If I were to build up a collection of camera lenses compatible with a Canon 6D, where would I be left (option-wise) in the future?
Thanks!
Last edited: